Loss and Gain as a Problem in Translation Process

22

2.7 Loss and Gain as a Problem in Translation Process

In doing the literary work, the translator cannot always present all the meanings contained in the source language comprehensively. Sometimes the translator should reduce the existing meaning, or add a new meaning in the target language, which then results in the phenomenon of “gain” and “loss” of translation. A factor causing this phenomenon is the fact that no languages have an absolute likeness. Another factor is the cultural gaps in which the languages involved exist. This strategy is commonly taken up by the translator to give an explanation and reason, to get the natural translation. Omission or in the order word is deletion. Seems to be the fastest strategy that translator simply omit the word. It gives an expression that the translator surrender to translate the word. Although translation by omission may sound as an extreme strategy, in some contexts it is acceptable to omit a word or expression. Translators can simply omit the different words or expression, it the meaning suggested by a particular item or expression is not very important enough to the development of the text. The purpose is to give a good reason for distracting the reader with Lengthy explanations. The translator delicates any point of the original text beyond the translator‟s ability to render. Newmark 1998 : 91 state that : The additional information a translator may have to add to his version is normally cultural accounting for difference between SL and TL culture, technical relating to the topic or linguistic explaining wayward use of words, and is dependent on the requirement of his, as opposed to the original, readership. In expressive texts, such information can normally only be given 23 outside the version, although brief concessions for minor cultural details can be made to the reader. Basnett – McGuire 1991 : 30 also state that : Once the principle is accepted that sameness can not exist between two languages, it becomes possible to approach the question of loss and gain in translation process. It is again an indication of the low status of translation that so much time should have been spent on discussing what is lost in the transfer of a text from SL to TL whilst ignoring what can also be gained, for the translator can at times enrich or clarify the SL text as a direct result of the translation process. Eugene Nida is a rich source of information about the problems of loss in translation, in particular about the difficulties encountered by the translator when faced with terms or concepts in the SL that do not exist in the TL. In Addition of information may also be required due to the shift of voice and the alteration of word classes to avoid misinterpretation Nida, 1964: 227. The word cut in I cut my finger is an active voice. If translated into Indonesian, the word class should be changed into a passive one, tersayat was cut and the addition of oleh pisau with knife is needed if a native speaker of Indonesian means that he or she did it by accident. There are also cases where two languages use a different class of words and a different level of utterances to denote the same meaning. The adjective adjustable in I have an adjustable chair is changed or translated into an adjective clause yang dapat disetel which can be adjusted in which the addition of yang which is obligatory to achieve grammaticality. However, the point is that we should not be afraid of literal translation, or, in particular, of using a TL word which looks the same or nearly the same as the SL word. Many common adjectives of feeling cut up meaning in their own way, 24 so that we cannot trust a transparent translation of sincere, loyal1, trivial, important, truculent, brutal; only one or two like excellent and marvellous are usually transparent. And again, the more general and abstract words phenomenon, element, affair may or may not be translated transparently; there is often a shift at that abstract level quality as property but the translation is still usually one-to-one. From theory above we can conclude that no languages have an absolute likeness and no one translator can always present all the meanings of SL, and sometimes the translator can omit the existing meaning and adding a new meaning in the TL. However, the translator should give an explanation and reasons to get natural translation to the reader. So, many theorists believe that translation is more a process of explanation, interpretation and reformulation of ideas than a transformation of words; that the role of language is secondary, it is merely a vector or carrier of thoughts. Consequently, everything is translatable, and linguistic difficulties do not exist.

2.8 Definition of Words, Phrases, Clauses, and Sentences